Shelile stonewalls press
- A minister under fire and the global threat of evading accountability
- Media fraternity condemns his refusal to answer critical questions on Seaboard deal
- Highlighting a dangerous trend for democracy
TEBOHO KHATEBE MOLEFI and
MOTSAMAI MOKOTJO
MASERU – In a stark defiance of democratic principles, Minister of Trade, Mokhethi Shelile, has drawn fierce condemnation from regional media watchdogs and analysts after publicly refusing to engage with this leading newspaper, exposing a deep-seated aversion to accountability that resonates with alarming global trends.
The firestorm erupted when Public Eye newspaper sought to question Shelile on his ministry’s puzzling decision to seek a fresh review from the African Legal Support Facility (ALSF) regarding the termination of ties with Seaboard Overseas Management, the majority shareholder in Lesotho Flour Mills (LFM).
This move is baffling because the ALSF itself provided a Due Diligence Report in 2019 that explicitly recommended the government cut its perpetual ties with Seaboard.
Shelile’s response was not one of clarification but of outright hostility.
When approached for an interview, the furious minister declared, “I will not do that… not after what you wrote about me recently; I am afraid of you, speak to the information officer.” Confronted on the critical matter of a potential new agreement with Seaboard, he snapped, “We have nothing to discuss,” before abruptly terminating the call.
This refusal to answer fundamental questions on how public assets and funds are managed has transformed a ministerial tantrum into a litmus test for governance in the country. It underscores a growing global playbook where officials, entrusted with public power, increasingly shun the fourth estate – the very institution designed to hold them to account on behalf of the citizenry.
The minister’s stance has been met with unified dismay from media and governance experts across Southern Africa, who label it short-sighted, damaging and a direct threat to transparent governance.
The most scathing criticism came from William Bird, Director of Media Monitoring Africa, who condemned Shelile’s actions as “very worrying” and destructive to public trust.
“Public officials are called that because they’re paid for by the very same public… part of accountability exists ahead of and beyond an election period,” Bird said. “To refuse to engage with the media flies in the face of good governance. He needs to look at himself.”
Prominent media lecturer, Professor Jimmy Kainje of the University of Malawi, dismissed Shelile’s personal grievances as irrelevant.
“It’s not a personal issue when you are asked him about work… since it’s a publicly related matter, he must answer your questions,” Kainje stated, emphasizing that public office demands public explanation.
Lekhanya Mpesi, a member of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Lesotho’s National Governing Council, echoed this, questioning the very foundation of ministerial responsibility: “How will he account and be transparent? We need to know what they are doing since public funds are being used.”
The Southern African Editors Forum (SAEF) has also publicly condemned these recent remarks made by Minister Shelile, denouncing them as inappropriate for a public servant.
The rebuke came from SAEF Secretary General, Willie Mponda, who stated in an interview that the minister had forfeited his right to privacy on the matter by failing to address the core issue and clarify the facts.
“As a public servant, he is accountable to the citizens. Had these questions been about his purely private affairs, that would be a different matter. However, in this instance, we find his utterances unacceptable and we condemn them unequivocally,” Mponda told Public Eye.
The SAEF intervention highlights the growing tension between the government and media bodies over accountability and transparency, reinforcing the principle that those holding public office must maintain a higher standard of communication and are subject to public scrutiny.
Shelile’s refusal to speak leaves a vacuum of accountability around two major controversies his ministry oversees.
The immediate cause of the confrontation revolves around Seaboard. For 27 years, the company, which manages the strategically vital LFM, has failed to pay dividends to the government, its minority shareholder. Shelile himself has previously expressed dissatisfaction, telling Public Eye, “those people’s performance hasn’t inspired confidence.”
The logical path seemed clear, act on the 2019 ALSF report and sever ties. Instead, cabinet has curiously engaged the same organization for another review. The questions Shelile evaded are therefore critical, among them being: Why commission a new report when a definitive one exists? What is the cost to the public purse? Was Cabinet aware of the 2019 findings? The silence is deafening.
This is not an isolated incident. Earlier this year, Public Eye exposed a separate scandal involving the new Lesotho Standards Institute (LSI) building. The African Development Bank (AfDB) had committed M200 million in financing but mandated an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) – a standard safeguard for such projects.
The ministry proceeded with construction without the required ESIA, leading the AfDB to withdraw its funding completely. This forced the government to finance the project from its own coffers. When questioned, Shelile offered a confusing defense, claiming the LSI had its own budget and bizarrely instructing this publication’s reporters to “leave AfDB; we are not in any relationship with them.”
An anonymous engineer, questioning Shelile’s understanding of the process, stated, “His comments indicate a lack of awareness regarding the fundamental purpose of an ESIA,” after the minister dismissively argued that an ESIA “does not coincide with geotechnical matters.”
Further investigations revealed a shocking lack of coordination. The Minister of Public Works, Neo Matjato Moteane, whose department is legally mandated to supervise such state constructions, stated he was “oblivious of the project.” “We have not seen documents…trade has not yet opened doors for us,” a low-spirited Moteane said, revealing a ministry operating in a silo, unchecked and unsupervised.
To add to the spectacle, the Ministry of Trade has reiterated on several occasions that the tender award for the construction of the new LSI head office was conducted properly and received clearance from the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO).
This reaffirmation came in response to longstanding allegations from a now-retired Procurement Manager within the same ministry, who claimed procurement processes were flouted during the tender. The officer in question was suspended from duty and later retired after she referred the irregularities surround the LSI building to the DCEO.
The anti-corruption body itself confirmed to this publication that they were investigating the retired official’s claims. DCEO spokesperson, ‘Matlhokomelo Senoko, stated that investigations into the matter were ongoing.
“I inquired with the investigator handling this case and was informed that, to their knowledge, the probe is continuing,” Senoko told this publication.
In a subsequent development, the Minister Shelile, acknowledged significant structural challenges at the construction site. The foundation is currently being dug up while the contractor encountered water seepage from the ground.
This issue brought the mandatory ESIA into sharp focus – a requirement Shelile had previously dismissed on multiple occasions. The necessity of the ESIA is now under scrutiny given the emerging ground conditions.
Minister Shelile’s behaviour is not unique, it is a symptom of a dangerous global erosion of media freedom and governmental accountability. From the sophisticated “legal” harassment of journalists in Hungary and Turkey to the violent suppression of dissent in Russia and Belarus, powerful figures are increasingly treating independent media as an enemy rather than a partner in governance.
In more established democracies, the tactic is often subtler, bypassing traditional media through social media echo chambers like foreign minister, Lejone Mpotjoane, or employing “strategic silence” on contentious issues and dismissing critical reporting as “fake news.”
This global playbook aims to delegitimize the press, break down the mechanisms of accountability, and allow officials to operate without the inconvenient scrutiny of an informed public.
By refusing to answer legitimate questions about the use of public funds and the management of public assets, Shelile is aligning himself with this illiberal trend. He is attempting to reframe accountability as an optional courtesy rather than a non-negotiable pillar of his office.
The condemnation of Minister Shelile by the media fraternity is about more than a refused interview. It is a defense of a fundamental democratic principle, that those who spend public money and make decisions on behalf of the people must explain their actions.
The unresolved questions surrounding the millions of public funds spent on the LSI building and the intended path forward with Seaboard and LFM demand answers. Silence breeds suspicion, erodes public trust, and fosters an environment where corruption and incompetence can thrive unchecked.
The media’s role is to ask these questions relentlessly. The minister’s role is to answer them.
His failure to do so is not just an affront to a single newspaper but a disservice to every Mosotho who has a right to know how their nation is being run. In his silence, the questions only grow louder and the shadow over his ministry only grows longer.
